Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Don't rabbit hole on who these people were. Consider the issue the examples present to the greater population and restriction of rights because of mental health issues.
Everyone has mental issues, there is not one person in the US that could undergo a period of evaluation and not one neurosis would be diagnosed, thus they would have "mental issues". Which is why we cannot use "no mental issues" as a yardstick for being competent to stand trial. The current yardstick is understanding the nature of their actions and the lawfully enforced penalties for committing those acts. If someone is found competent by that yardstick the yardstick precludes removing rights for things like adopting kids, buying cars or houses, entering into a business contract, buying or possessing firearms, etc.
If you change the definition to something less strict, then do we not prosecute those who have their rights so restricted? Because if we think that they are incompetent to exercise those rights prior to any use of those rights to cause harm, haven't we made a clear and unequivocal statement that we do not think them capable of understanding the nature of their actions and any punishment for those actions? For instance if you don't trust your dogs toilet training, and go on a four hour drive somewhere and back leaving the dog indoors and find that the dog has done their business all over the house, who's really to blame, is it the dog, or you? I don't know about you, but if someone did that I'd think they were a complete moron, what did they expect.
So what is your solution, we obviously have a problem with mentally ill people acquiring guns. The state data is anemic since and even people like this are out there, rest assured he isn't the only one. These businesses don't want to be responsible for entirely destroying someone's life, firing is bad enough but he had some real issues. The police had to pry him out of his chair to remove him from the station and he threatened all the employees before he departed.
Seems like there should be a separate data base for people like this some where between mentally ill and normal just for the express purpose of preventing him from acquiring a firearm.
So what is your solution, we obviously have a problem with mentally ill people acquiring guns. The state data is anemic since and even people like this are out there, rest assured he isn't the only one. These businesses don't want to be responsible for entirely destroying someone's life, firing is bad enough but he had some real issues. The police had to pry him out of his chair to remove him from the station and he threatened all the employees before he departed.
Seems like there should be a separate data base for people like this some where between mentally ill and normal just for the express purpose of preventing him from acquiring a firearm.
My solution is not to make a vain attempt to blame "mental illness" for something that it clearly is not responsible for, and then removing people's rights for no reason than thinking you're doing something. Obviously someone who shoots up a theater and kills people is mentally ill right? Well no they're not, they were determined to be mentally competent after months of observation and analysis.
The issue is to look at the problem, you cannot use the term mentally ill, because there is no standard of what is or is not mentally ill, at it's absolute extents either all of us are, or none of us are. Everyone has neuroses and disorders, its not whether you have them, it's how they affect your daily life.
You also don't really want to determine mental illness anyway, you want to determine propensity for violence, and this is clearly predicated by a history of violence, not a history of mental illness.
The issue is you're pinning the label on the wrong thing, mentally ill people do not commit violence any more frequently than the non-mentally ill. But people with a history of violence do commit violence more frequently than people who do not have that history. So why are we picking on people who are mentally ill? Perhaps because they're easy targets.
Bring back mental institutions and call them what they are.
Agreed.
Quote:
The only way you are going to reduce(not eliminate) mentally ill people from getting a hammer, scissors, knife, or a gun and do damage to others, in an insane attack.
Today, they are medicated and walk the streets with guns, knives and even their fists...
Those institutions were closed in the 1980s as a cost-cutting measure under the Reagan administration.
Where are the savings?
All we really got was a few hundred thousand homeless bums hanging out of street corners with cardboard signs.
My solution is not to make a vain attempt to blame "mental illness" for something that it clearly is not responsible for, and then removing people's rights for no reason than thinking you're doing something. Obviously someone who shoots up a theater and kills people is mentally ill right? Well no they're not, they were determined to be mentally competent after months of observation and analysis.
The issue is to look at the problem, you cannot use the term mentally ill, because there is no standard of what is or is not mentally ill, at it's absolute extents either all of us are, or none of us are. Everyone has neuroses and disorders, its not whether you have them, it's how they affect your daily life.
You also don't really want to determine mental illness anyway, you want to determine propensity for violence, and this is clearly predicated by a history of violence, not a history of mental illness.
The issue is you're pinning the label on the wrong thing, mentally ill people do not commit violence any more frequently than the non-mentally ill. But people with a history of violence do commit violence more frequently than people who do not have that history. So why are we picking on people who are mentally ill? Perhaps because they're easy targets.
I agree.
He mentally ill are easy to blame for all sorts of societal problems. They are easy to put in a nice neat box of "problems" and swept away as if they are sub human.
Just look at the various threads on this topic and how few people fights for the rights and freedoms of individuals with mental illness, probably less than a handful in this very thread.
Those institutions were closed in the 1980s as a cost-cutting measure under the Reagan administration.
Where are the savings?
All we really got was a few hundred thousand homeless bums hanging out of street corners with cardboard signs.
You need to do some reading on the legal decisions leading up to the release of thousands of individuals that were institutionalize r against their will without due process.
So what is your solution, we obviously have a problem with mentally ill people acquiring guns. The state data is anemic since and even people like this are out there, rest assured he isn't the only one. These businesses don't want to be responsible for entirely destroying someone's life, firing is bad enough but he had some real issues. The police had to pry him out of his chair to remove him from the station and he threatened all the employees before he departed.
Seems like there should be a separate data base for people like this some where between mentally ill and normal just for the express purpose of preventing him from acquiring a firearm.
Godlessness is turning us back into uncivilized people.
This makes no sense. We should be blamed for not diagnosing a person, but that person can have free access to lethal weapons with no qualifying standards? How about some sort of mental health screening before someone can get such guns. Folks with bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, or schizophrenia have no business packing heat. Buying a gun should be a hell of a lot harder than buying a toothbrush.
Why is that. Do you know how many in this country have been diagnosed with these disorders? Probably millions. And how many with these disorders have actually killed someone. Learn about mental health and stop stigmatizing those that do.
There is a comment here just screaming to be made, but I won't make it... LOL
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
